Environmentally responsible personal cleansing compostions with high performance

ABSTRACT

A method is provided for formulating a personal cleansing composition. At least one primary surfactant, at least one secondary amphoteric and/or nonionic surfactant, at least one humectant, and at least one polymeric and/or quaternary conditioner are selected, each of these components having a natural and renewable resource origin. The primary and secondary surfactants are combined with the at least one humectant and the at least one conditioner in a final composition that includes the combined primary and secondary surfactants at less than about 14 wt. %, and includes the combined at least one humectant and at least one conditioner at less than 5.5 wt. %. After forming the final composition, an optimum performance index (OPI) is determined for the composition to ensure that the composition has an OPI of at least about 5.450. The OPI is calculated as: OPI=3÷((solids wt. %+Zein score)÷performance grade).

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application is a Divisional of co-pending U.S. application Ser. No.12/150,221, filed Apr. 25, 2008, herein incorporated by reference.

FIELD OF INVENTION

The present invention relates to various consumer, commercial, andindustrial products, including but not limited to personal cleansingcompositions. This invention more particularly relates to a variety ofpersonal cleansing products, including body wash, liquid hand soaps, andnatural body washes and hand soaps.

BACKGROUND

Many consumers have a preference for products that are purported to havelesser adverse environmental impacts than other similar products. Thispreference is evidenced by the growth of the “organic” foods market, andby the labeling of products with markings such as “environmentallyfriendly” or “green.”

Apart from consumer preferences for environmentally friendly products,governments are increasingly regulating from an environmental standpointthe content of products. To ensure the widest distribution andacceptance of their products, manufacturers therefore have good reasonto take into account a wide variety of differing environmental legalrequirements.

The art has therefore begun to develop a number of different techniquesfor taking into account environmental issues when formulating productsand acquiring their raw materials. In one approach the art has developeda public “grading system” that grades possible adverse environmentaleffects of products. Such systems are known to be associated withcertain seals of approval by organizations having a perceived objectivereputation regarding environmental matters.

To be commercially viable, a product should also meet certain cost andperformance criteria, regardless of environmental attributes. Yet,available grading systems do not take into account a product's efficacyor the desirable attributes of a product. It is therefore desirable toprovide a system for evaluating the environmental impact of chemicalcomponents, and thereby formulating products having improvedenvironmental characteristics and performance attributes.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 is a chart that depicts the combination of selected consumerproperties, clinical properties, and material properties to form anenvironmentally responsible cleansing composition;

FIG. 2 is a flow diagram depicting a method of formulating anenvironmentally responsible cleansing composition; and

FIG. 3 is a graph that compares skin conductivity values after washingwith various personal cleansing compositions, and compares these valueswith skin rinsed solely with water.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

According to one exemplary embodiment of the invention, a personalcleansing composition is provided. The composition includes at least oneprimary surfactant having a natural and renewable resource origin, atleast one secondary amphoteric and/or nonionic surfactant having anatural and renewable resource origin, at least one humectant having anatural and renewable resource origin, and at least one polymeric and/orquaternary conditioner having a natural and renewable resource origin.The composition has an optimum performance index (OPI) of at least about5.450. The OPI is calculated by the formula: OPI=3÷((solids wt. %+Zeinscore)÷performance grade).

According to another exemplary embodiment of the invention, a method isprovided for formulating a personal cleansing composition. To start, atleast one primary surfactant, at least one secondary amphoteric and/ornonionic surfactant, at least one humectant, and at least one polymericand/or quaternary conditioner are selected, each of these componentshaving a natural and renewable resource origin. The primary andsecondary surfactants are combined with the at least one humectant andthe at least one conditioner in a final composition including thecombined primary and secondary surfactants at less than about 14 wt. %,and further including the combined at least one humectant and at leastone conditioner at less than 5.5 wt. %. After forming the finalcomposition, an optimum performance index (OPI) is determined for thecomposition to ensure that the composition has an OPI of at least about5.450, as calculated by the above formula.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

The following description is of exemplary embodiments only and is notintended to limit the scope, applicability or configuration of theinvention in any way. Rather, the following description provides aconvenient illustration for implementing exemplary embodiments of theinvention. Various changes to the described embodiments may be made inthe function and relative amounts of components described withoutdeparting from the scope of the invention as set forth in the appendedclaims. Additionally, though described herein largely in the context ofa personal cleansing products, those skilled in the art will appreciatethat the inventive concepts described herein may likewise apply to otherproducts as well.

Three factors are considered with respect to the efficacy andenvironmental impact of the particular products of the presentinvention, namely, a) the use of biodegradable and low toxicityingredients that include or are generated from renewable resources, b)low carbon dioxide emissions from the product itself, and c) theperformance or efficacy of the product. Heretofore, compositions tendedto be created by sacrificing at least one of the foregoing three factorswhen another was enhanced. The present invention minimizes or eliminatessuch sacrifice, realizing optimal benefits of each factor.

According to various embodiments, the present invention accomplishes thegoal of producing formulations for personal cleansing products thatexhibit high consumer performance and are still environmentallyresponsible compositions. Referring to FIG. 1, a chart depicts thecombination of selected consumer properties, clinical properties, andmaterial properties to form an environmentally responsible cleansingcomposition according to an exemplary embodiment of the invention. Asdepicted in the chart, each of these property categories corresponds toa circular region, and the region in which all three property categoriesoverlap corresponds to formulations for personal cleansing compositionsthat a) exhibit good performance attributes including high lathercontent during washing, pleasant skin-feel, and clean rinsing, b) haveoptimal mildness properties as determined by objective assays, and c)constitute environmentally responsible formulations that produce lowcarbon dioxide emissions and have high biodegradability. In addition,the cleansing compositions have an optimal performance score of at least5.450, the formula for which will be hereinafter described.

FIG. 2 is a flow diagram depicting an exemplary method of formulatingthe environmentally responsible cleansing compositions having theattributes outlined in FIG. 1. As depicted, the method starts by firstchoosing at least one primary surfactant and at least one secondarysurfactant as step 100. The at least one primary surfactant may beselected from any of the known anionic, amphoteric, or non-ionicsurfactants known or previously used in the art of aqueous surfactant,detergent and cleansing compositions. Suitable anionic surfactantsinclude, but are not limited to, alkyl sulfates, alkyl ether sulfates,alkyl aryl sulfonates, alkyl succinates, alkyl sulfosuccinates, N-alkoylsarcosinates, alkyl phosphates, alkyl ether phosphates, alkyl ethercarboxylates, alkylamino acids, alkyl peptides, alkoyl taurates, fattyacids, acyl and alkyl glutamates, and alkyl isethionates, most typicallyincorporated as their sodium, potassium, magnesium, ammonium and/ormono-, di- and triethanolammonium salts. The alkyl groups that make upthe hydrophobic portion of these surfactants generally contain from 8 to18 carbon atoms and may have various degrees of unsaturation. The alkylether sulfates, alkyl ether phosphates and alkyl ether carboxylates maycontain from 1 to 10 ethylene oxide and/or propylene oxide units permolecule, and preferably contain 0 to 2 ethylene oxide units permolecule. Examples of suitable anionic surfactants include sodium andammonium lauryl ether sulfate with 1-3 moles of ethylene oxide, sodium,ammonium, and triethanol-ammonium lauryl sulfate, disodium laurethsulfosuccinate, sodium cocoyl isethionate, sodium laureth-6 carboxylate,sodium C₁₂-C₁₅ pareth sulfate, sodium methyl cocoyl taurate, sodiumcocoyl sarcosinate, and fatty acid soaps (sodium, potassium, magnesium,ammonium, and/or mono-, di-, or triethanol-ammonium salts of fattyacids). Suitable amphoteric and zwitterionic surfactant materialsinclude but are not limited to alkyl betaines, alkyl amidopropylbetaines, alkyl sulphobetaines, alkyl glycinates, alkylcarboxyglycinates, alkyl amphopropionates, alkyl amidopropylhydroxysultaines, acyl taurates and acyl glutamates wherein the alkyland acyl groups have from 8 to 18 carbon atoms. Examples includecocamidopropyl betaine, sodium cocoamphoacetate, cocamidopropylhydroxysultaine, and sodium cocamphopropionate. Suitable nonionicsurfactants include but are not limited to aliphatic (C₆-C₁₈) primary orsecondary linear or branched chain acids, alcohols or phenols, and alkylphenol alkoxylates. Other suitable nonionics include mono- or di-alkylalkanolamides and alkyl polysaccharides, and sorbitan fatty acid esters.Examples of suitable nonionic surfactants include coconut mono- ordiethanolamide, coconut diglucoside, alkyl polyglucosides,cocamidopropyl and lauramine N-oxide, cetearyl alcohol, lanolin alcohol,stearic acid, and glyceryl stearate.

The at least one secondary surfactant ingredient is selected from knownamphoteric/zwitterionic or non-ionic surfactant ingredients. Suitableamphoteric and zwitterionic surfactant materials include but are notlimited to alkyl betaines, alkyl amidopropyl betaines, alkylsulphobetaines, alkyl glycinates, alkyl carboxyglycinates, alkylamphopropionates, alkyl amidopropyl hydroxysultaines, acyl taurates andacyl glutamates wherein the alkyl and acyl groups have from 8 to carbonatoms. Examples include cocamidopropyl betaine, sodium cocoamphoacetate,cocamidopropyl hydroxysultaine, and sodium cocamphopropionate. Suitablenonionic surfactants include but are not limited to aliphatic (C₆-C₁₈)primary or secondary linear or branched chain acids, alcohols orphenols. Other suitable nonionics include mono- or di-alkylalkanolamides and alkyl polysaccharides, and sorbitan fatty acid esters.Examples of suitable nonionic surfactants include coconut mono- ordiethanolamide, coconut diglucoside, alkyl polyglucosides,cocamidopropyl and lauramine N-oxide, cetearyl alcohol, lanolin alcohol,stearic acid, and glyceryl stearate.

Before continuing past the step of selecting primary and secondarysurfactant ingredients, a determination is made regarding the origin ofthe selected surfactants as step 102. If each of the surfactants isdetermined to have a natural and renewable resource origin, thenadditional ingredients may be selected. If one or more of the primaryand secondary surfactants do not have a natural and renewable resourceorigin, then those surfactants are not used, and, returning to step 100,different surfactants are selected. Natural and renewable resourceorigin chemicals are chemicals that have a starting source from amaterial that can be easily renewed or replaced, such as plants andanimal products. Examples of renewable origin or resources include, butare not limited to, coconut oil, palm oil, corn, cotton, or wood.Examples of non-renewable resource origin chemicals or resources thatcannot be easily replaced include, but are not limited to coal,petroleum, and silica or other mined minerals.

Continuing with the method, at least one humectant is selected as step104. Humectants are moisture retentive materials, or “moisturizers.”Suitable humectants include any hygroscopic material that is effectivein providing moisturization to keratinized tissue such as skin and hair.Humectants suitable for use in the compositions of the present inventioninclude any hygroscopic material having a solubility of at least 50% byweight in water at 25° C. Many of these preferred humectants will haveone or more hydroxyl groups attached and are commonly classed aspolyols, charbohydrates, amides, alkanolamides, or amines. Non-limitingexamples of which include glycerin, sorbitol, honey, glucose, fructose,sucrose, lactic acid, sodium lactate, lactamide, sodium PCA,hydrogenated starch hydrosalate, hydrolyzed corn starch, lactamide MEA,and urea.

Before continuing past the step of selecting one or more humectantingredients, a determination is made regarding the origin of theselected humectants as step 106. If each of the humectants is determinedto have a natural and renewable resource origin, then additionalingredients for the formulation may be selected. If one or more of thehumectants do not have a natural and renewable resource origin, thenthose humectants are not used, and, returning to step 104, one or moredifferent humectants are selected.

Continuing further with the method of formulating a personal cleansingcomposition, at least one polymeric and/or quaternary skin conditioneris selected as step 108. Cationic quaternary ammonium compounds exhibita positive charge that makes the material substantive to the slightlynegatively charged skin and hair proteins, making most monomeric andpolymeric quaternary molecules suitable for hair and skin conditioningpurposes and as antistatics. Suitable cationic skin conditioningingredients include a synthetic, but naturally derived cationic polymer,not limited to polyquaternium-10 or hydroxypropyl guarhydroxypropyltrimonium chloride or a quaternary ammonium compound, notlimited to cocamidopropyl PG-dimonium chloride, hydrogenated starchhydrolysate hydroxypropyltrimonium chloride, hydroxypropyltrimoniumhydrolyzed wheat protein, and the like.

Before continuing past the step of selecting one or more conditioners, adetermination is made regarding the origin of the selected conditionersas step 110. If each of the conditioners is determined to have a naturaland renewable resource origin, then additional ingredients for theformulation may be selected. If one or more of the conditioners do nothave a natural and renewable resource origin, then those conditionersare not used, and returning to step 108, one or more differentconditioners are selected.

After selecting surfactants, humectants, and skin conditioners, themethod continues by selecting miscellaneous functional additives as step112. Such additives may include pH and viscosity modifiers, fragranceoil, botanical extracts or oils, opacifying agents, and/or exfoliatingagents. A few non-limiting examples of pH modifiers include citric acid,malic acid, salicylic acid, and sodium hydroxide. Sodium chloride andammonium chloride are just a couple of non-limiting examples ofviscosity modifiers. Several non-limiting examples of botanical extractsor botanical oils include citrus grandis (grapefruit) fruit extract,punica granatum Extract (pomegranate), rosemary officinalis (rosemary)leaf extract, mentha peperita (peppermint) leaf extract, prunusamygdalus dulcis (sweet almond) seed extract, almond oil, theobromacacao (cocoa) seed butter, sunflowerseed oil, soybean oil, and lavenderoil (lavandula angustifolia). A few non-limiting examples of opacifyingagents include glycol stearate, glycol distearate, titanium dioxide,mica, and magnesium aluminum silicate. Finally, a few non-limitingexamples of exfoliating agents include apricot seed meal, walnut shells,jojoba esters, silica, ground vanilla seeds, rice bran wax, and carnaubawax.

At least one preservative may also be included in the composition aspart of the miscellaneous additives. If so, the method continues to step114 for a determination of whether each preservative is furthercharacterized as being globally approved, and being a non-formaldehydeor formaldehyde-releasing compound, and also being non-paraben andnon-isothiazolinone in nature. If not, returning to step 112, differentpreservatives are selected as part of the miscellaneous additives.Non-limiting examples of suitable preservatives include benzoic acid,sorbic acid, sodium benzoate, sorbic acid, sodium salicylate, salicylicacid, phenoxyethanol, caprylyl glycol, tropolone, glucose oxidase,lactoperoxidase, and combinations of the like, intended for preservationof the finished formula; salts, opacifying agents, pH adjusters and orfragrance oils.

Having selected main ingredients and any other additive functionalingredients for the personal cleansing composition, the method continuesto step 116 by completing the formulation. Next, decisions are maderegarding whether groups of the main functional ingredients are includedat suitable concentrations. As part of these decisions, it is determinedas step 118 whether the total surfactant concentration is less thanabout 14 wt. %. If not, the method returns to step 100 for selection ofthe primary surfactants and/or the amount of each to be included.According to a preferred embodiment, the total concentration of the atleast one primary surfactant ranges between about 3 and about 8 wt. %,and the total concentration of the at least one secondary surfactantranges between about 2 and about 6 wt. %.

It is also determined as step 120 whether the combined humectant andskin conditioner concentrations is less than about 5.5 wt. %. If not,the method returns to steps 104 and/or 108 for selection of thehumectant and/or the skin conditioner and/or the amount of each to beincluded. According to a preferred embodiment, the at least onehumectant is included in the range of about 1 to about 4 wt. %, and theat least one conditioner is included in the range of about 0.1 to about1.5 wt. %.

It is further determined as step 122 whether there is less than about 2wt. % preservative in the completed formulation. If not, then the methodreturns to step 112 for selection of the preservative as part of themiscellaneous functional additives and/or the amount of preservative tobe included. A preferred personal cleansing composition includescombined miscellaneous functional additives in the range of 0.1 to 2.0%by weight.

Continuing with the method, a determination is next made as step 124regarding whether the personal cleansing composition has an optimumperformance index (OPI) of at least about 5.450. The OPI is calculatedby the formula:

OPI=3÷[(solids wt. %+Zein score)÷performance grade].

In order to obtain an adequate OPI, the percentage by weight of thetotal solids content is an important factor since lower amounts ofsolids impart to the personal cleansing composition a betterenvironmental impact to the waste stream. An exemplary formulation has atotal solids concentration that is no greater than about 24 wt. %.

Likewise, the Zein score for a personal cleansing composition isimportant because a low Zein score corresponds to a high prediction forskin mildness. Performing a test that measures the amount of cornprotein (zein) that is dissolved by a surfactant mixture or cleansingproduct, such as a body wash, obtains the Zein score. The greater theamount of zein that is dissolved in a personal cleansing product, theharsher a product is indicated to be. Therefore, a low Zein scoreindicates a mild overall formulation, and consequently, a better productfor personal cleansing use.

Finally, the performance grade is obtained by testing the personalcleansing composition for consumer overall liking. According to the OPIcalculation, the performance grade is a number between 1 and 100, andequals a percentage of a maximum possible grade that can be awarded. Forexample, a preferred personal cleansing composition has a performancegrade that is at least about 80% of a maximum possible grade for aconsumer liking test. Particulars of such tests will be subsequentlydiscussed.

Before returning to a discussion of the manner by which the total solidswt. %, the Zein score, and the performance grade for a personalcleansing composition contributes to the OPI, Table 1 below outlinesthree exemplary compositions (“Formulas A, C, and G”), including theirmain functional ingredients, that satisfy the previously-discussedcomposition qualifications, including their ingredients.

TABLE 1 Renewable Formula A Formula C Formula G Resource Origin % byWeight % by Weight % by Weight Water Water Q.S. Q.S. Q.S.Polyquaternium-10 Cotton 0.2-0.5 0.1-0.4 * Glycerin (99%) Coconut, Palm2.0-4.0  1.0-2.75 2.0-4.0 Oil or Tallow Cocamidopropyl Betaine CoconutOil 4.5-6.5 4.0-6.0 6.0-8.0 PEG-7 Glyceryl Cocoate Coconut Oil 0.1-0.60.1-0.6 * Sodium Laureth Sulfate, Coconut or 5.0-8.0 4.5-6.5 2 mole PalmOil Decyl Glucoside Corn * 0.75-2.0  3.0-5.0 Sodium Lauroyl LactylateCorn * *  0.5-1.25 Cocamidopropyl Coconut Oil 0.75-3.0  *Hydroxysultaine Sodium Cocoamphoacetate Coconut Oil * * 4.0-6.5 SodiumLauroyl Sarcosinate Coconut or * * 0.5-2.0 Palm Oil PPG-2 Hydroxyethyl *0.1-1.0 * 0.1-1.0 Coco/Isostearamide Glycol Distearate * 0.5-1.0 * *Cocamidopropyl PG-Dimonium Coconut Oil  0.1-0.75  0.1-0.75 * ChlorideCoco-Glucoside, Glyceryl Corn * * 0.5-2.0 Oleate Sodium Benzoate *0.1-0.8 0.1-0.8 0.1-0.8 Citric Acid, Anhydrous Corn 0.05-0.3  0.05-0.3 0.05-0.3  Botanical Extracts Plant 0.05-0.2  0.05-0.2  0.05-0.2  SodiumChloride * 0.1-0.5 0.1-0.5 * Fragrance * 0.5-1.5 0.5-1.5 0.5-1.5

As previously discussed, the percentage by weight of the total solidscontent is one factor when calculating the OPI for a particular personalcleansing composition, and an exemplary formulation has a total solidsconcentration that is no greater than about 24 wt. %. Table 2 lists allof the ingredients for Formula A, and an example of a conventionalcommercialized formulation (“Comparative Formula B”) is also included inthe table.

TABLE 2 Formula A Comparative Formula B Formula Water, Sodium LaurethWater, Glycine Soja Oil Ingredients = Sulfate, Cocamidopropyl (Soybean)(or) Betaine, Glycerin, Helianthus Annuus Seed Cocamidopropyl Oil(Sunflower), Glycerin, Hydroxysultaine, Ammonium Lauryl Sulfate,Fragrance, Hydrolyzed Cocamidopropyl Betaine, Yogurt Protein,Petrolatum, Ammonium Aloe Barbadensis Leaf Laureth Sulfate, CocamideJuice, Decyl Glucoside, MEA, Lauric Acid, PPG-2 Hydroxyethyl Fragrance,Cucumis Sativus Coco/Isostearamide, Fruit Extract (Cucumber), PEG-7Glyceryl Cocoate, Camellia Sinensis Leaf Cocamidopropyl Extract (GreenTea), Guar PG-Dimonium Chloride, HydroxypropyltrimoniumPolyquaternium-10, Chloride, Lanolin Alcohol, Tetrasodium EDTA, PEG-5Cocamide, Propylene Sodium Benzoate, Glycol, DMDM Hydantoin, CitricAcid, Citric Acid, Tetrasodium Sodium Chloride EDTA, Etidronic Acid,Green 3 (CI 42053), Titanium Dioxide (CI 77891), Yellow 10 (CI 47005)Total Solids 22.5 44.3 (%) =

Before continuing with other factors that contribute to a personalcleansing composition's OPI, it is also preferable for a composition toproduce low carbon dioxide emissions. Preliminarily, “carbon dioxideemissions” generally refers to a measure of the amount of carbon dioxideor CO₂ emitted through the combustion of fossil fuels; in the case of anorganization, business or enterprise, as part of their everydayoperations; in the case of an individual or household, as part of theirdaily lives; or in the case of a product or commodity, as part ofreaching market. In terms of materials, it is essentially a measure ofembodied energy, the result of life cycle analysis. This is directlyrelated to the amount of natural resources consumed, increasingly usedor referred to as a measure of environmental impact. Carbon dioxide isrecognized as a greenhouse gas, of which increasing levels in theatmosphere are linked to global warming and climate change.

There are many versions of calculators available for carbon dioxideemissions. However, in simple terms, it can be measured by determiningthe total carbon in a given formulation and determining the amount ofcarbon dioxide the product will produce over time as it enters the wastestream.

For example, in the context of skin care positioned body washes, variousknown formulations have measurable CO₂ emissions assuming a 5.0 gtypical dose/use level. An exemplary skin care or other personalcleansing composition has a total carbon percentage no greater thanabout 11.5%. Furthermore, an exemplary personal cleansing compositionhas carbon dioxide emissions that do not exceed 2.5 g per 5 g of productdose or usage. Table A lists the total carbon percentage, together withthe carbon dioxide emissions for previously disclosed Formula A andComparative Formula B.

TABLE 3 Skin Care Body Wash Comparison Comparative Formula A Formula BTotal Carbon (%) = 7.8 27.2 Grams CO2 emissions per 2.07 4.98 singleproduct dose/use = Pounds CO2 emissions per 4.56 10.99 1,000 doses/uses=

As another example, in the context of environmentally responsible bodywashes, various known formulations have measurable CO₂ emissionsassuming a 5.0 g typical dose/use level. Table 4 lists the ingredientsfor Formula C, and Comparative Formulas D and E, along with their totalsolids content, their total carbon content, and their carbon dioxideemissions. The examples of Tables 3 and 4 illustrate exemplary carbondioxide emissions by assuming that every component of the composition(all of the carbon) will break down and form CO₂.

TABLE 4 Natural Body Wash Carbon Comparison Comparative ComparativeFormula C Formula D Formula E Formula Water, Sodium Laureth Water, DecylGlucoside, Water, Potassium Cocoate, Ingredients = Sulfate,Cocamidopropyl Lauryl Glucoside, Potassium Palmate, Betaine, Glycerin,Coco-Betaine, Sodium Glycerin, Coco-Glucoside, Decyl Glucoside, CocoylHydrolyzed Soy Sodium Chloride, Sucrose Fragrance, PEG-7 Protein,Sucrose Cocoate, Cocoate, Lavender Oil and Glyceryl Cocoate,Coco-Glucoside, Glyceryl other Natural Oils, Polyquaternium-10, Oleate,Honey, Betaine, Hydrolyzed Wheat Protein, Cocamidopropyl Glycerin,Hydrolyzed Wheat Gluten, PG-Dimonium Chloride, HydroxypropyltrimoniumPotassium Phytate Sodium Benzoate, Citric Oligosaccharide, Natural Acid,Sodium Chloride. Oils, Glucose Oxidase, Lacoperoxidase. Total Solids20.0 31.1 37.8 (%) = Total Carbon 11.2 18.0 21.6 (%) = Grams CO2emissions per 2.05 3.30 3.96 single product dose/use = Pounds CO2emissions per 4.52 7.27 8.72 1,000 doses/uses =

Returning now with a discussion of factors that affect the calculationof a personal cleansing compositions's OPI, the Zein score for apersonal cleansing composition is important because, as previouslydiscussed, a low Zein score indicates a mild overall formulation, andconsequently, a better product for personal cleansing use. An optimumrange for a Zein score is 0% to 25%. One exemplary method for obtaininga Zein score includes preparing a 20 wt. % solution of the personalcleansing composition in water, and to add 1.5 g of zein powder into 30g of the solution. After filtering and drying the solution, the amountof remaining zein is measured, and the percentage of zein that wasdissolved in the personal cleansing composition is then calculated. Thepercentage is the number used to calculate the composition's OPI.

Table 5 lists the Zein scores for exemplary Formulas A and C, along withscores for conventional comparative formulas B, D, E, and F, based onin-vitro mildness tests.

TABLE 5 Zein Test (In-Vitro Mildness Test) of Various Body Washes ZeinScore Formula C 21 Formula A 23 Comparative 4 Formula D Comparative 75Formula F Comparative 52 Formula B Comparative 97 Formula E

As previously discussed, the performance grade is the final variablethat is used to calculate a personal cleansing composition's OPI, and isobtained by testing the personal cleansing composition for consumeroverall liking. The performance grade is a number between 1 and 100, andis preferably is at least 80, meaning that a personal cleansingcomposition has a performance grade that is at least about 80% of amaximum possible grade for a consumer liking test. An exemplary methodof screening the finished personal cleansing composition to gauge“performance” is a consumer liking test, such as a home use test, duringwhich the consumer evaluates their overall liking for the composition,as well as their liking of key performance attributes. The test isperformed blindly, meaning that the consumer is unable to determine fromany containers, indicia, etc. the source of the composition. Further,the test is performed by a diverse pool of consumers covering a widedemographic range in categories that include, as appropriate, geography,race, age, and sex. A large number of consumers, i.e. preferably atleast 200, test the composition, and a statistically significantdifference should result at the 95% confidence level.

Personal cleansing compositions, selected and manufactured in accordancewith various embodiments of the present invention, exhibit surprisingconsumer performance attributes, clinical moisturization, and in-vitromildness results. Furthermore, as listed in Tables 6 and 7, the overallliking for exemplary skin care and natural body washes such as Formula Aare significantly higher (83%) than that of comparative body washes suchas Comparative Formula B (76.7%). For the data represented in Tables 6and 7, the consumers were able to grade the compositions based on anine-point scale, with 9.0 being the highest possible performance score,7.0-9.0 being considered by the consumer as having high performance,6.0-6.9 being considered by the consumer as having mediocre performance,and less than 6.0 being considered by the consumer as having inferiorperformance.

TABLE 6 Consumer Test Results for Skin Care Body Washes ComparativeFormula A Formula B Base: Females 25-49 yrs old, users of skin-care bodywash (218) (176) A B Liking/Agree scales (9-point) (9 Like/AgreeExtremely- 1 Dislike/Disagree Extremely) Overall Liking 7.5B 6.9 OverallLiking, % of 83.3 B 76.7 9 Point Scale Overall Lather Liking 7.9B 6.6Skin Feels Smooth 7.3B 6.9 I don't need to use much 7.8B 6.5 to get agood lather Skin feels hydrated 7.5B 6.9 *A letter next to the numberindicates a statistically higher significance at the 95% confidencelevel than the corresponding letter (product).

TABLE 7 Consumer Test Results for Natural Body Washes ComparativeComparative Formula C Formula D Formula E Base: Females 24-59 yrs old,users of natural body wash (236) (236) (234) Liking scales (9-point) (9Like Extremely- 1 Dislike Extremely) Overall Liking 7.5 DE 5.6 6.0Overall Liking, % of 83.3 DE  62.2 66.7 9 Point Scale Overall FragranceLiking 7.3 DE 4.4 5.7 Overall Strength of 7.1 DE 4.7 5.9 FragranceLiking Overall Lather Liking 7.5 DE 6.5 6.4 Overall Appearance Liking7.3 DE 5.7 6.2 Overall Liking Way Made 7.4 DE 6.1 6.3 Skin FeelAgreement Ratings (9-point) (1-completely disagree

9-completely agree) Leaves skin feeling clean 7.8 DE 6.7 6.9 Gentlycleanses skin 7.8 DE 6.5 6.9 Does not dry out skin 7.6 DE 6.2 6.6 Leavesskin feeling 7.1 DE 5.5 6.0 moisturized Leaves skin feeling 7.3 DE 6.06.3 soft and smooth

The combination of the three variables, total solids, Zein score, andthe performance grade, produces an OPI of greater than 5.450 forpersonal cleansing compositions of the present invention. Table 8 liststhe OPI for exemplary formulas A and C, and also for commercializedComparative Formulas B, D, E, and F.

TABLE F OPI of Various Body Washes Zein Consumer Mildness Overall LikingFormula % Solids Score % of 9 pt Scale OPI Formula C 20.0 21 83.3 6.095Formula A 22.5 23 83.3 5.492 Comparative 31.1 4 62.2 5.316 Formula DComparative 14.9 75 80.0 2.670 Formula F Comparative 44.3 52 76.7 2.389Formula B Comparative 37.8 97 66.7 1.484 Formula E

The personal cleansing compositions may be further optimized in terms oftheir environmental, skin or hair mildness, or consumer likingperformance. For example, an exemplary composition imparts superior skinmoisturization when compared with water. As one example, FIG. 3 is agraph that compares skin conductivity values after washing with FormulaC and Comparative Formula E, and compares these values with skin rinsedsolely with water, with all testing being performed following thestandard leg controlled application test (LCAT). According to anexemplary LCAT method, subjects are washed with an adequate amount (i.e.250 ml) of a cleansing composition after obtaining baseline conductivitymeasurements for the skin prior to washing. Visual and instrumentalmeasurements are then taken at 30 minutes, 1 hour, 2 hours, and 3 hoursafter washing. A conductivity meter measures skin surface conductivity.Skin that contains a high level of moisture will exhibit higherconductance properties. Visual dryness is also measured to indicate howmoisturized the skin appears. The top layer of the sratum corneum willappear smoother and/or less flaky for more moisturized skin. As depictedin the graph, cleaning with Formula C imparts significantly improvedskin conductivity, and consequently significantly improvedmoisturization, to skin than cleaning with water alone, whileComparative Formula E is not significantly different than water alone.

Furthermore, exemplary personal cleansing compositions of the presentinvention also are formed from ingredients that are biodegradable. Moreparticularly, preferable personal cleansing compositions include the atleast one primary and secondary surfactants, and the at least onehumectant as compounds that experience greater than 60% biodegradationwithin 28 days.

While at least one exemplary embodiment has been presented in theforegoing detailed description of the invention, it should beappreciated that a vast number of variations exist. It should also beappreciated that the exemplary embodiment or exemplary embodiments areonly examples, and are not intended to limit the scope, applicability,or configuration of the invention in any way. Rather, the foregoingdetailed description will provide those skilled in the art with aconvenient road map for implementing an exemplary embodiment of theinvention, it being understood that various changes may be made in thefunction and arrangement of elements described in an exemplaryembodiment without departing from the scope of the invention as setforth in the appended claims and their legal equivalents.

1. A method of formulating a personal cleansing composition, comprising: selecting at least one primary surfactant having a natural and renewable resource origin; selecting at least one secondary amphoteric and/or nonionic surfactant having a natural and renewable resource origin; selecting at least one humectant having a natural and renewable resource origin; selecting at least one polymeric and/or quaternary conditioner having a natural and renewable resource origin; combining the primary and secondary surfactants with the at least one humectant and the at least one conditioner in a final composition including the combined primary and secondary surfactants at less than about 14 wt. %, and further including the combined at least one humectant and at least one conditioner at less than 5.5 wt. %, the final composition having an optimum performance index (OPI) of at least about 5.450, calculated by the formula: OPI=3÷((solids wt. %+Zein score)÷performance grade).
 2. The method according to claim 13, further comprising: ensuring that the performance grade component of the OPI is at least about 80% of a maximum possible grade.
 3. The method according to claim 13, further comprising: ensuring that the solids wt. % component of the OPI is no greater than about 24 wt. %.
 4. The method according to claim 13, further comprising: ensuring that the final composition has a total carbon percentage no greater than about 11.5%.
 5. The method according to claim 13, further comprising: ensuring that the final composition has carbon dioxide emissions that do not exceed about 2.5 g per 5 g of product dose or usage.
 6. The method according to claim 13, further comprising: selecting a preservative that is a non-formaldehyde-releasing compound and also is a non-paraben and a non-isothiazolinone compound; and combining the preservative as part of the final composition.
 7. The method according to claim 13, further comprising: ensuring that the final composition imparts superior skin moisturization when compared with water.
 8. The method according to claim 13, wherein the step of selecting the at least one primary and secondary surfactants and the at least one humectant includes selecting compounds that experience greater than 60% biodegradation within 28 days. 